I’m just updating some chapters for Alan Hardacre’s “How to Work With the EU Institutions”. The update is made easier by being able to draw on a package of checklists and case studies of the everyday procedures an EU lobbyist deals with.
What strikes me is that most of the procedures lobbyists work on repeat themselves, but not in the exact same way.
Sure the specific issue, people, and politics are different. But, the steps the proposal will go through, the hurdles, both procedural and votes, are the same.
This is even the case for some of the more obscure procedures.
If you get fixated that your issue is unique and so special that the laws of political reality and procedures are suspended you’ll be in for a shock.
Now, there are cases when those laws are suspended for brief celestial moments. But, basing your efforts on such moments is brave.
Why you should copy W.Edwards Deming
There are more practical reasons, other than embracing political defeat, to systemize your practice.
-
To borrow from W.Edwards Deming, if you can’t describe what you are doing, on paper, you are unlikely going to know what you are doing. As you likely want a lobbyist who knows what they are doing if they helping you.
-
Your power of mental recall can only be enhanced by having a package of processes, checklists, SOPs, case studies, templates and examples, at hand for when you are asked about a specific procedure or step in the procedure. You can of course ignore this suggestion if your have a perfect visual memory and telepathy.
-
There is a lot of your work you’d likely want to be able to delegate to others. They unlikely have your ‘perfect understanding’ of the process at hand. This package of material will make it all but certain that when delegate correctly, that you’ll get a product back from your colleague that looks like you did it, and maybe even better. It helps to add a loom video of you going through one of the steps preparing the supporting products, e.g. an credible amendment, clear and concise position paper (they do exist). Done well, a reasonably smart person, not necessarily an expert in the field, can follow your loom video, and re-construct good advice, recommendations, or product, that for all intents and purposes looks like you prepared it.
-
Maybe your colleagues doing your work will find it interesting and learn. Of course, it is unfair to give someone a task to do that you expect them to create some near perfect product if the only guidance is ‘here is a position paper I did earlier, use that’, if this is the first time they have prepared a position paper, and, more importantly, have no idea the process to prepare a clear and concise position paper. It may explain why clear and concise positions are so rare in Brussels? So, the big advantage of preparing this package – processes, checklists, SOPs, case studies, templates and examples, and loom video – is that colleagues won’t be frustrated. I liken it to throwing the keys to your car to someone who does not drive and asking them to drive on the motorway, at night, with no road lighting, and make sure everything goes well.
Many professions follow this approach (surgeons, pilots, engineers), but for reasons that are not clear me, it appears to be a sin for most lobbyists. I believe the reason for this is that most lobbyists in Brussels have photographic memories and can communicate by telepathy.